The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Helping Hands St Albans

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

First Floor, Calverton House, Harpenden Road, St Albans, Hertfordshire, AL3 5AB (01727) 224171

Provided and run by:
Midshires Care Limited

All Inspections

26 May 2016

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an unannounced focused inspection of this service on 28 May 2016 in response to concerns received at the Care Quality Commission in relation to people’s safety and the overall management of the service. We undertook this inspection to check if people were being kept safe, risk assessments were being completed and reviewed and staff knew how to keep people safe. This report only covers our findings in relation to these areas. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Helping Hands St Albans on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

At the previous inspection on 30 October 2015 we found that the provider was meeting the regulations the Health and Social care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. However at this inspection we found Improvements were required in the two key areas we assessed. We also found breaches in two of the regulations.

Helping Hands St Albans provides personal care and support to up to 80 people living in their own homes including daily visits and a live in service.

There was a new manager in post who was not currently registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We found that there were some processes in place and risks to people’s safety and well-being had been assessed and were kept under annual review. However staff had not always followed the appropriate guidance provided and had undertaken tasks for which they had not been trained and this had caused harm to a person who used the service. We found that actions had been put in place to address the issues of concern and the staff concerned were not working at the service at the time of our inspection. The manager was being supported by the provider and was also working with the local authority to identify priorities and to make improvements to the safety of people who used the service. This included undertaking observed practice, spot checks and individual supervisions to review staff training and development needs. We found that some actions had been taken to start addressing these concerns and mitigate the immediate risks to people but further work was needed to help ensure people’s safety and well-being was maintained.

30 September 2015

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced inspection on 30 September 2015. Between this date and 8 October 2015, we spoke with care staff, people who used the service and their relatives or friends by phone to get feedback about the service.

The service provided care and support to adults in their own homes. People supported by the service were living with a variety of needs which included age related health conditions, physical fragility and dementia. At the time of the inspection, 46 people were being supported by the service. People were supported with personal care, assisted with medication, domestic support and ‘wellbeing visits’.

The service had a manager, who was in the process of being registered with the Care Quality Commission. There was also an existing registered manager, who was not at the service during the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People’s needs had been assessed, and care plans took account of their individual needs, preferences, and choices. There were risk assessments in place that gave guidance to staff on how risks to people could be minimised. There were systems in place to safeguard people from the risk of avoidable harm.

The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and there were sufficient staff to support people safely. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Staff obtained people’s consent prior to care being provided.

Staff received support and supervision, and had received appropriate training, relevant to their roles.

People were supported by staff who were caring and respectful. People who wished to, were also supported to pursue their interests and hobbies. People were supported to access health services including GP and Hospital appointments when required.

The provider had a procedure for handling complaints, comments and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people and acted on the comments received to continually improve the quality of the service.

The provider had effective quality monitoring processes in place. All aspects of the service were monitored by a central quality monitoring department. The service used a digital system which meant records were all held securely on the IT system. Access was via password and only people authorised to access them were able to do so.

24, 25 January 2014

During a routine inspection

We visited the service on 24 January and on 25 January spoke with four people that used the service and two relatives of other people. We spoke with six staff and also looked at the care plans and associated records of ten people using the service. The service provided both a live-in carer service as well as a hourly visiting service for people in their own homes.

People that we spoke to all made positive comments about the service and the staff. One person told us "One couldn't wish for any better. The carer I have is absolutely marvellous. They respond quickly if I have any concerns". Another person told us "They are very good. I have no problems with their service and I would recommend them". A third person said "They are the best. I have no complaints at all". The staff we spoke to all said that they had very good support and that communication was very clear and efficient.

We found that the service had robust care plans in place to help support people with their needs and that there were well structured systems in place for supporting people to take their own medicines as per their prescriptions.

The service had robust and effective systems for supporting staff and for matching staff skills to the needs of individual clients.

We found that the service had an effective complaints procedure that was responsive to any concerns that had been raised.

19 March 2013

During a routine inspection

As part of this inspection we carried out telephone interviews with five people who received a live-in home care service, five relatives who acted on their behalf and four care staff who supported them.

People who had received a service were positive about the support they received from their current live-in care workers. They reported that the staff had received the training they needed to meet their individual needs and that staff treated them and their homes, with respect. People told us their life style choices were respected. One person told us that the service “was very good”, they were “very happy” and it had made their life “a lot easier”. Another person said that their live in care worker had “incredibly good experience” and had “given them their life back”.

Overall, relatives who supported people receiving a service, confirmed that a good service was being provided. They discussed initial anxieties of finding the right care worker for their relative but acknowledged that once things had been set up and arrangements had been put in place, to cover their permanent care workers breaks, the service worked well. One person said “the service is brilliant”, my relative “has never been so happy”. Another person told us that the service was “excellent” they had “never come across anything like it before”. However, one person, who contacted us directly, raised concerns about the quality and reliability of the care workers provided.